Current Events > Rittenhouse takes the stand.

(+) Yeah! (+)

chrono625 posted...

you keep ignoring self defense. Youre being purposely obtuse. You claim you love guns, but he didnt use them for their purpose? What exactly is a firearms purpose if not for fucking self defense or hunting?

Hasan said it best. Firearms are just murder dildos.... and they are. They are made for taking the lives of things.

---

Sayoria posted...

Hasan said it best

For the sake of your own credibility, you should never begin a statement with those words.

---

lolife67 posted...

I wouldn't say "grand," no, nor do I think it's a "conspiracy". It's fairly commonplace.

This "RIGGED TRIAL" is, by definition, a conspiracy.

And yeah, sure it's "common".

---

Sayoria posted...

Hasan said it best. Firearms are just murder dildos.... and they are. They are made for taking the lives of things.

better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

For the sake of your own credibility, you should never begin a statement with those words.

Hasan is the guy with a unironic commie flag in the background, isn't he? I haven't checked, all I saw was the first second and then I read the comments and figured this wasn't worth giving ad revenue and watch time.

Sad to say that certain DBD figures like Dowsey watch Hasan and have admitted it on Twitter. But it's to be expected, given that the DBD devs are Twitter stans, they'd obviously attract that crowd.

---

Sayoria posted...

Hasan said it best. Firearms are just murder dildos.... and they are. They are made for taking the lives of things.

Yes, firearms are made for taking the lives of things.

They are weapons, but they function as tools. They are used for hunting. They are used for self-defense against those who would exert physical advantage, like being taller.

They equalize the old and the young, the disabled and the able, men and women, short and tall. They allow those who would be victims of evil, the old, the disabled, women, short people, you name it... because they can't defend themselves physically the ability to fight back.

To oppose this is to oppose the great equalizer between everyone. You ARE bad or idiotic for opposing gun carrying, and nothing will change my mind. I've seen every argument, it's all naivete or defending the lives of people who decided others' lives don't matter.

---

I havent kept up with the trial, but whats everyones stance on this? Are you for the kid or against him? Did new evidence come up? All Im aware of from before the trial was this Kyle kid traveled with intention to use a gun to shoot people if he felt he needed to. Which he did and killed 2 people while doing so. Is there more to debate?

---

Vanished posted...

Yes, firearms are made for taking the lives of things.

They are weapons, but they function as tools. They are used for hunting (To kill animals). They are used for self-defense against those who would exert physical advantage (To hurt/kill attackers), like being taller.

They equalize the old and the young (To give an older person the ability to hurt/kill), the disabled and the able (To allow the disadvantaged to hurt or kill), men and women (To allow women to hurt or kill), short and tall (To allow smaller people to hurt or kill).

Cool, so what I said is accurate and you agree. They are still items intended to do some level of harm to something else. That's all I said, and it's true. Glad you agree that the only function a gun has is to inflict pain.

---

chrono625 posted...

This topic is terrifying.

we have a live trial going on with pretty solid evidence and testimony and we still have people who want to dismiss self defense, pretend the 3 individuals who were shot were just innocent protestors, who want this guy murked unsuspectingly. All because he isnt part of their political spectrum.

we want justice! We want fair and equitable due process!

here it is.

no not like this!

Yep.

--Zero- posted...

I havent kept up with the trial, but whats everyones stance on this? Are you for the kid or against him? Did new evidence come up? All Im aware of from before the trial was this Kyle kid traveled with intention to use a gun to shoot people if he felt he needed to. Which he did and killed 2 people while doing so. Is there more to debate?

I despise Kyle but I think self defense is probably the right ruling. Its really hard to tell what went down before the cameras rolled but from the footage that was seen Kyle defended himself. I dont think he shouldve been there though and should do time for the firearm

---

Idk yall the thought of a 17 year old crossing state lines carrying a firearm with sentiment and intentions clearly against that of the protest is just a recipe for trouble, and Im not surprised things played out the way they did when someone so young does this kind of stuff

---

troll_swag posted...

You cannot claim self defense while in commission of a crime

This is absolutely not true in all circumstances. You are entitled under the law to defend yourself from unlawful violence against yourself.

By your logic if you're jaywalking you can't legally defend yourself if someone were you attack you with a knife while you're committing that crime


---

deanshow posted...

I despise Kyle but I think self defense is probably the right ruling. Its really hard to tell what went down before the cameras rolled but from the footage that was seen Kyle defended himself. I dont think he shouldve been there though and should do time for the firearm

Pretty much the reality of it all...... though the judge isn't helping, as he has a massively clear bias since the whole trial began.

---

deanshow posted...

I despise Kyle but I think self defense is probably the right ruling. Its really hard to tell what went down before the cameras rolled but from the footage that was seen Kyle defended himself. I dont think he shouldve been there though and should do time for the firearm

I guess I could see both sides debating the issue if its over self defense. 2 people were killed and 1 was wounded. I personally dont see self defense when the numbers are beyond 1 person. I could see the people that were shot calling self defense if they were alive being threatened by a kid bringing an assault rifle to the protest and using it on someone too.

Sounds like a really fucked up situation.

---

PoundGarden posted...

His mere presence is antagonistic, openly carrying at a volatile situation and playing cop when he has no right or authority to do so.

Omg what *BRAINBLAST*

People openly carry around their rifles in open carry states, like you dont just have people randomly attacking armed citizens because "dey scareddd".

Also I would think the best time to have a gun for self-defense WOULD be in the volatile situation.

Omg what *BRAINBLAST*

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Bruh he was putting out fires, offering medical attention, and cleaning graffiti.

None of which required an assault rifle to perform. What was he doing, shooting the graffiti off of the buildings?

He brought the gun in case he needed to defend himself. Which he did.

Yes, too bad all the other unarmed people there rendering medical aid were all brutally beaten by the protestors because they were unarmed.

Oh wait.

---

Matelite posted...

You're leaving out some big details. You know, like the pedophile with a history of violence against minors was chasing a minor trying to kill him.

Weird, Rittenhouse didnt know about Rosenbaums past so why dont you stop posting that bullshit.

and yes, keep making everything about muh illegal immigration when were talking a violent offender committing a violent offense. Really showing what yall think about immigration and immigrants in general if you are talking about a VIOLENT OFFENDER and equating that to muh immigration!
---

mybbqrules posted...

None of which required an assault rifle to perform. What was he doing, shooting the graffiti off of the buildings?
Yes, too bad all the other unarmed people there rendering medical aid were all brutally beaten by the protestors because they were unarmed.

Oh wait.

And there were plenty of armed medics there as evidenced in the trial. One of them was Gaige Grosskreutz, who obviously had a gun.

And it ended up saving his life, since again, he was attacked unprovoked.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Weird, Rittenhouse didnt know about Rosenbaums past so why dont you stop posting that bullshit.

and yes, keep making everything about muh illegal immigration when were talking a violent offender committing a violent offense. Really showing what yall think about immigration and immigrants in general if you are talking about a VIOLENT OFFENDER and equating that to muh immigration!

So as I asked you, what options does one have in that situation?

A) Let the attack happen?
B) Shoot knowing you're going to jail?
C) Naruto teleport?

---

You conviently forgot another option.

D) dont go to another state with a firearm you shouldnt be carrying and maybe, just maybe, people wont be tense around you and feel that youre a threat

Because its pretty fucking sick that all people can say about Rosenbaum is that he was a pedo and Kyle had to fear because of that as if Kyle knew that shit when he shot him. Guess what; Kyle wouldnt have been threatened by Rosenbaum if he didnt fucking show up to a protest, especially with a fucking gun.

Its also sick that people said something along the lines of people testified that they didnt feel threatened of Kyle when 2 people who got shot cant tell their side of the story and if they felt threatened by Kyle being there.

But no, just make it about Kyle and not the two people that lost their life.

Like none of this would have happened if Kyle didnt show up with a gun that wasnt his to a protest where tensions were, and this might be a shock to some people, but extremely fucking high. Yeah, Rosenbaum probably shouldnt have done the dumb shit he did to Kyle or even threaten Kyle at all. But that still doesnt excuse the fact that KYLE BROKE THE FUCKING LAW FIRST.
---

Solid Snake07 posted...

I legitimately can't believe this is happening. Judge looks like he's about to absolutely lose it

Just got home from work, I look for this one...
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

But that still doesnt excuse the fact that KYLE BROKE THE FUCKING LAW FIRST.

Kyle breaking the law first doesn't mean he relinquishes his right to self defense when he gets attacked. this isn't hard.

---

--Zero- posted... I havent kept up with the trial, but whats everyones stance on this? Are you for the kid or against him? Did new evidence come up? All Im aware of from before the trial was this Kyle kid traveled with intention to use a gun to shoot people if he felt he needed to. Which he did and killed 2 people while doing so. Is there more to debate?

All of the evidence points towards self-defense and not murder. Like, it's literally all on video that you can watch yourself and corroborated by witnesses, including one of the guys who was shot. The fact that some liberals/leftists refuse to swallow this since Kyle is a chud or whatever looks pretty bad for them, as they're usually the same sort of people screeching about conservatives being irrational.

---

sutree posted...

All of the evidence points towards self-defense and not murder. Like, it's literally all on video that you can watch yourself and corroborated by witnesses, including one of the guys who was shot. The fact that some liberals/leftists refuse to swallow this since Kyle is a chud or whatever looks pretty bad for them, as they're usually the same sort of people screeching about conservatives being irrational.

but have you considered he... crossed a state line!

---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

You conviently forgot another option.

D) dont go to another state with a firearm you shouldnt be carrying and maybe, just maybe, people wont be tense around you and feel that youre a threat

What kind of dumb ass response is this?

I said he went. Now what? Answer what a person is supposed to do. He went 20 miles, so you're already being dishonest by bringing up state lines.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Because its pretty fucking sick that all people can say about Rosenbaum is that he was a pedo and Kyle had to fear because of that as if Kyle knew that shit when he shot him. Guess what; Kyle wouldnt have been threatened by Rosenbaum if he didnt fucking show up to a protest, especially with a fucking gun.

I'm not bringing up that Rosenbaum is a pedo.

And he went. It doesn't void his self defense because there was nothing illegal about being in a big ass area with hundreds of other people.

There's absolutely no proof whatsoever that Rosenbaum was scared or reacted because he was there with a gun or anything. All evidence shows that he was unhinged, starting fires, destroying property and going around making threats.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Its also sick that people said something along the lines of people testified that they didnt feel threatened of Kyle when 2 people who got shot cant tell their side of the story and if they felt threatened by Kyle being there.

But no, just make it about Kyle and not the two people that lost their life.

More dumb shit. Who is even talking about people being scared after the first shooting happened?

Not a single shred of evidence has come out that they or anybody was scared of this guy or the other people with guns unless after the shooting with Rosenbaum. Almost everybody there had guns and we have video of Rittenhouse walking around for over an hour and not a single person is scared or trying to start shit.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Like none of this would have happened if Kyle didnt show up with a gun that wasnt his to a protest where tensions were, and this might be a shock to some people, but extremely fucking high. Yeah, Rosenbaum probably shouldnt have done the dumb shit he did to Kyle or even threaten Kyle at all. But that still doesnt excuse the fact that KYLE BROKE THE FUCKING LAW FIRST.

Breaking the law doesn't nullify self-defense. Just being there doesn't nullify self-defense. Just having a gun in an open carry state doesn't mean you can disarm whoever you want.

No evidence at all anybody feared him and reacted. Plenty of evidence Rosenbaum was simply acting unhinged.

---

Rosenbaum presumably didn't know that Rittenhouse had a gun he was too young to carry, or that he crossed state lines to be there. So you can say anything you want about Rittenhouse being there for one reason or another...

But the truth is that none of those factors came into play for how Rosenbaum behaved. He attacked a teenager for no fucking reason, and that's the pertinent fact of this case. Rittenhouse didn't start the altercation. Rosenbaum did.

---

sutree posted...

All of the evidence points towards self-defense and not murder. Like, it's literally all on video that you can watch yourself and corroborated by witnesses, including one of the guys who was shot. The fact that some liberals/leftists refuse to swallow this since Kyle is a chud or whatever looks pretty bad for them, as they're usually the same sort of people screeching about conservatives being irrational.

If I watch the video Ill probably see it your way. I went in not knowing much outside of the original story. Thanks for pointing that out.


---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

You conviently forgot another option.

D) dont go to another state with a firearm you shouldnt be carrying and maybe, just maybe, people wont be tense around you and feel that youre a threat

Because its pretty fucking sick that all people can say about Rosenbaum is that he was a pedo and Kyle had to fear because of that as if Kyle knew that shit when he shot him. Guess what; Kyle wouldnt have been threatened by Rosenbaum if he didnt fucking show up to a protest, especially with a fucking gun.

Its also sick that people said something along the lines of people testified that they didnt feel threatened of Kyle when 2 people who got shot cant tell their side of the story and if they felt threatened by Kyle being there.

But no, just make it about Kyle and not the two people that lost their life.

Like none of this would have happened if Kyle didnt show up with a gun that wasnt his to a protest where tensions were, and this might be a shock to some people, but extremely fucking high. Yeah, Rosenbaum probably shouldnt have done the dumb shit he did to Kyle or even threaten Kyle at all. But that still doesnt excuse the fact that KYLE BROKE THE FUCKING LAW FIRST.

The fuck is your problem?

---

the prosecution sucked

---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KYLE BROKE THE FUCKING LAW FIRST.

Chill out, dude. Kyle defended himself against a violent attack by several individuals, used no more force than was necessary and can be seen to have lowered his weapon when people near him were not acting in a threatening manner toward him.

Those two people you're so empathetic with may not be here to tell their side of the story, but don't worry--there are plenty of witnesses testifying, and plenty of videos with evidence to show that those two individuals were violently attacking Kyle in an unlawful and dangerous manner. That's all it takes to justify self defense.

Maybe it's true that Kyle wouldn't have shot them if Kyle hadn't been there, but he also wouldn't have shot them if they hadn't attacked him. The blame goes to the assailants, not the teenager who was defending himself from their brazen attacks upon his person. There's no question that they were trying to hurt him. He had 100% justification to fear for his life in that moment.

---

Even if he weren't charged for murder, trying to dismiss the prior crimes really just says more about you than you think. Picking and choosing what to address is how to expose one's own bias and toxic tribalism.

---

Maybe Kyle was worried that Rosenbaum was about to assault him. Didnt he have a thing for underage boys?

---

Oh cool, my post that brought up a lot of things that the prosecution got Kyle to confirm, followed by me asking if they're trying to imply that Kyle knew better and had motive which in turn made reference to the parts that Kyle had confirmed? Modded for trolling.

But people repeating the same "I dunno what to tell you man it's self defense" posts that add nothing else are just fine. :la

---

Should get the death penalty.

#1. 17 year olds cannot be allowed to kill people on their best judgement cause they do not have best judgement.

#2. They were taking his gun away. Yes, Kyle Rittenhouse or anybody does not get to kill a man because the man is taking his gun away.

#3 Whether it is a lie or an error in judgement, having your gun taken away from you is not a threat on your life!

* * *

Due to the educational level of the US population, open carry law has to be modified to state you may not carry a weapon into any situation where your gun may taken from you unless you are on-duty military or law enforcement.

---

totalnerdken posted...

Umm... The state literally disagrees with you. Just even touching someone else's gun is both assault and legally changes the situation into dual possession of the gun, meaning that the person touching it counts as a threat with a weapon.

See my mod above

"
Due to the educational level of the US population, open carry law has to be modified to state you may not carry a weapon into any situation where your gun may taken from you unless you are on-duty military or law enforcement.
"

Above poster is good example of the educational level of the US population.

It is presumed you are going to carry a weapon responsibly and carrying it where it may be taken from you is irresponsible.

---

CobraGT posted...

#1. 17 year olds cannot be allowed to kill people on their best judgement cause they do not have best judgement.

#2. They were taking his gun away. Yes, Kyle Rittenhouse or anybody does not get to kill a man because the man is taking his gun away.

#3 Whether it is a lie or an error in judgement, having your gun taken away from you is not a threat on your life!

A man chasing you telling you he is going to kill you and lunging for your gun in not threat to your life... Clearly the child rapist only had Kyle's best interests at heart!

---

CobraGT posted...

#2. They were taking his gun away. Yes, Kyle Rittenhouse or anybody does not get to kill a man because the man is taking his gun away.

#3 Whether it is a lie or an error in judgement, having your gun taken away from you is not a threat on your life!

lmao!

Lmao at Cobra. These people don't even see the irony in their posts. Talking about educational levels and then just posting up straight misinformed BS.

---

Sit on your ass please. This will solve your problems.

---

CobraGT posted...

Sit on your ass please. This will solve your problems.

What a weird post when you literally posted stuff that didn't even happen.

You're the same guy who was telling people the cop that shot Ma'khia Bryant should have tackled her as if he was The Flash instead because of some nonsense about school teachers being able to do it.

---

CobraGT posted...

#2. They were taking his gun away. Yes, Kyle Rittenhouse or anybody does not get to kill a man because the man is taking his gun away.

#3 Whether it is a lie or an error in judgement, having your gun taken away from you is not a threat on your life!

Now this is a certified knee-slapper of a post right here. Lmao

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Now this is a certified knee-slapper of a post right here. Lmao

Of course. Rational thought is taking guns to riots and using your ass for laughing.

Hero Kyle has to be found guilty because of the consequences.

---

Link to the stream?

Youtube
> "Rittenhouse" as search term
> Washington Post live stream

Pretty easy to find.

---

Did they seriously ask if he played CoD, like it was a relevant factor?

And he just clapped back on the dude like "Its pretend"

---

I bet rittenhouse is wishing he stayed home now. Can't believe the parents were dumb enough to encourage him.

---

Flauros posted...

Did they seriously ask if he played CoD, like it was a relevant factor?

And he just clapped back on the dude like "Its pretend"

I think the point was to emphasize that he only had the gun because he thought it was cool.

---